Kimberly Strassel, is an American author, journalist, and a member of the Wall Street Journal editorial board. She writes a weekly conservative column, "Potomac Watch", which appears on Fridays in the WSJ. Strassel has been one of the leading voices in the Russia collusion and investigative reporting on the bias and egregious nature of the Mueller special counsel. Today she joins us to discuss the criminal referrals by Congressman Devin Nunes and the testimony by AG Barr.The Sean Hannity Show is on weekdays from 3 pm to 6 pm ET on iHeartRadio and Hannity.com. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.comSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Glad you are with us right down our toll-free telephone number.
You want to be a part of the program.
I don't know why those other parents didn't follow the role of uh Felicity Huffman and 13 others and fall on the sword if they're guilty in this college thing.
Um because otherwise, you know, they're making a big mistake.
Uh anyway, but there's no truth to the lie that Trump is looking to bring back child separation.
Can I just say that for everybody?
Uh well, the polls in Israel have just closed.
What we're hearing it could be very, very, very tight.
Uh nobody knows how this is ultimately going to end up.
I'm just hoping that B.B. Netanyahu gets to form the next government.
Because what they did to him before this election, I've never heard of that.
You're indicting for cigars.
Just ridiculous.
Uh, we'll get to that also.
There is now a tremendous amount of pressure being brought to bear on Kim Fox, the attorney in Chicago, uh, even though the I guess Rainbow Push Coalition had her, Bobby Rush, claims now of racism, et cetera.
Um, we'll get to all of that in the course of the program.
We have other news breaking on the deep state that is extraordinarily revealing.
Doug Collins now is giving us more closed door testimony as it relates to in this case the head counsel of the FBI under Comey, the general counsel, and that would be James Baker.
We have a lot to get to.
We're gonna un unravel all of this.
We have it all.
The attorney general appearing uh earlier today and going backwards, uh, I guess sometime this afternoon, Bill Barr at a hearing, um, just describing in detail.
I'll go over a couple of these.
We'll play more in later in the program, but where he goes over the four areas of the Mueller report, which will be redacted.
Now remember, it was people like the cowardly Schiff, you know, excoriating how dare Devin Nunes release things where it's possible that sources and methods will be released.
Um that is just basic common practice.
Now, if you go back to the independent council statute that was in place when Bill Clinton got impeached, it was the Democrats that wanted this law fixed and changed.
And they're the ones that at that time there's 17 Democrats, including Navler.
They didn't want the Star Report released.
And then they changed the law.
Now we've got a special counsel which gave more control to the attorney general and Department of Justice.
And anyway, well, they're saying who put the I don't I'm not sure I believe it.
They haven't even counted the votes yet.
That Gance has beaten Netanyahu with the larger number of seats, uh, claiming that uh exit polls released late in the evening would show that he's had, well, okay.
Exit polls in Israel are as relying as reliable as they are here.
The polls just closed.
So I'm I'm not taking that to mean anything.
Because you still got to count the votes, exit polls.
Exit polls in 2004.
Remember 515 on this radio program.
I got the exit polls.
John Kerry was going to be the next president.
John Kerry defeated George W. Bush.
Big problem with that.
Didn't happen.
At 5.35 Eastern time that afternoon, Dick Cheney called this radio program.
And he was pushing hard for Ohio voters and Florida Panhandle and Southwest Florida voters to get out and vote.
Those were the two states they had to win to win re-election.
And they did handily.
There was no recount or dimpled or pimpled or swinging or hanging or you know, broken chads.
No double votes.
Uh so I'm not taking any, I'm taking all this with a grain of salt.
Um actually, there's two polls actually that now have come out of Israel.
One has a tide, one has Gans up by four.
Uh, but in 2016, well, when I got the exit polls, I get them every election year at 5.15 while I'm on the air.
Somehow I'm on the air and I'm trying to navigate, reading it, and you're not allowed to report it.
But all these people on TV, you can tell by their attitude, they were giddy.
They're so happy because they read the exit polls.
You're not allowed to release some of the information or the majority of information in the exit polls until later.
Okay.
So they're giddy.
I read the same exit poll.
I happened to talk to Donald Trump.
I said, I called him in the first break.
I said, you're going to get somebody walking into your office drawing straws right now.
Who's going to get who's going to be picked and have the duty to walk in and tell you bad news is coming?
I said, don't believe it.
Then I told him the Dick Cheney story.
Well, it happened again, uh, because according to the exit polls in 2016, Donald Trump had lost North Carolina.
He had lost Pennsylvania.
He had lost Michigan.
He had lost Wisconsin.
He had lost Ohio.
He had lost Florida.
He lost it all.
You know, we couldn't even see if he was going to win any states.
The exit polls are notoriously wrong.
Now, I don't know if that's going to be the case today, but I certainly hope so.
I certainly hope so.
But with all the shenanigans, you talk about a witch hunt in America.
This is a witch hunt against Prime Minister Netanyahu.
If you look at the residence of the Prime Minister of Israel, and you compare it to any other head of state, it's like the equivalent of a two-bedroom apartment in New York City.
It is not ostentatious.
It is not presidential.
It's not frankly fitting the office of a prime minister.
And the idea that cigars and maybe a bottle of wine somehow results in an indictment five weeks before the election is absurd.
And this guy's had more moral clarity on the world stage when others have had none, as we saw 9-11 and the dangers we're facing.
All right, let me get back to uh what's happened.
So Bill Barr, let me go over what he said about the Mueller report first, and then we'll get into Judicial Watch now has uncovered discussions uh in the latest production of emails.
Matter of fact, hundreds of them suggesting the entire collection could be classified and basically a cover-up of FBI documents, 422 pages of FBI documents showing evidence of cover-up discussions related to the Clinton email system within the Platte River networks.
That was the place that held Hillary's secret server in the Mom and Pop Shop bathroom closet.
They were the vendor that managed the Clinton email system.
The documents now show intelligence community people, Inspector General Charles McCullough forwarding concerns about the classified information on her emails.
New documents uncovered by Judicial Watch contain Clinton's 2009 classified information.
Uh non-disclosure agreement bearing her signature.
And anyway, so we'll get to that today.
And now we have Doug Collins striking again with the general counsel of the FBI.
So we have two big pieces of news we've got to sift through in the course of the program today.
But let's go to Barr's testimony, which was supposed to be about the budget over at the Department of Justice, but he, of course, was asked repeatedly about the Mueller report.
And uh he says that, well, here are the areas that have to be redacted, and he says that it will be released likely to the public within a week.
But I am uh relying on my own discretion uh to make as much uh public as I can.
Now, in my letter of the March 29th, I identified four areas that I feel should be redacted, and I think most people would agree.
The first is grand jury information, 6E material.
The second is information that the IC, the intelligence community believes would reveal intelligence sources and methods.
The third uh are information in the report that could interfere with ongoing prosecutions.
Uh, you will recall that uh the special counsel did spin off a number of cases that are still being pursued, and we want to make sure that none of the information in the report would impinge upon either the ability of the prosecutors to prosecute the cases or the fairness to the defendants.
And finally, uh uh we uh intend to redact information uh that implicates the privacy or reputational interests of peripheral players where there is a decision not to charge them.
Uh right now, the special counsel is working with us on identifying information in the reports that fall under those four categories.
This process is going along uh uh very well.
And uh my original timetable uh of being able to release this uh uh by mid April's stands.
And so I I think that uh from my standpoint uh by the by uh within a week, uh I will be in a position to release the report to the public, and then I will uh engage with the chairman of both judiciary committees about that report and about any further requests that they have.
And by the way, Barr said that he didn't expect or anticipate that there would be any use of executive uh privilege, which would be open to the White House, which I think they probably should use, but whatever.
And he testified and said that the IG Horowitz and the FISA investigation, that that may be done by Mayor June.
That's going to be huge.
And he was uh in fact reviewing the conduct of the summer of 2016 investigation.
And as it relates to the the individual who leaked the FISA order against Carter Page, Barr said if there is a predicate for an investigation that it will be conducted.
He wouldn't answer whether the White House has seen the report.
And uh so we move forward from here.
Now, Barr did say during his testimony that by the way, this is the appropriations committee.
This is supposed to be about money.
Anyway, Barr explained that the Justice Department Inspector General has his pending report.
He also confirmed he's personally reviewing the investigation, and he said more generally I'm reviewing the conduct of the investigation and trying to get my arms around the aspects of the counterintelligence investigation, crossfire hurricane that was conducted in the summer of 2016.
And that came after the ranking member Devin Nunes said over the weekend that he's preparing these criminal referrals that will be coming out this week.
Let me just go over the quick list.
We're gonna be getting those criminal referrals.
We're gonna be getting the IG report.
We're gonna be getting the investigation into leaks by John Hoover.
We're gonna be getting more closed door testimony like we got from Baker today.
We're gonna be getting more Pfizer requests.
We're gonna eventually get the Pfizer warrants.
We're eventually going to get the 302s, the conversations and as as and remarks between people like Orr and Christopher Steele.
We're also going to get the gang of eight information and and much, much more.
This and what this is going to end up doing is I believe you're going to see not only criminal referrals but indictments of those that abuse their power.
And that's why he's investigating, you know, what is FBI DOJ misconduct in all of this.
Mark Meadows said today that uh about the criminal referrals that the right move from Devin Nunes.
More criminal referrals are to come, and certainly more deserved overwhelming evidence shows multiple FBI DOJ executives abuse their power to undermine a duly elected president.
They will all be held accountable.
He's absolutely right.
And it even gets deeper than that.
And I'll get to that in the next segment and um a lot more information.
We're also watching the results out of Israel.
We have any new information, we'll pass that on to you.
Uh, we have Greg Jarrett and David Schoen going to be checking in today.
Kimberly Strassel checks in with us today.
We'll get a lot of your calls in at some point in the program.
Hey, if you're one of thirty-four million Americans that smokes, you know what a hassle it can be.
For me, I'm out playing golf and I come back smelling like cigars.
It's the smell on your hands and your breath, your clothes.
But now, thanks to Jewel, you don't have to worry about it anymore.
Jewel is a vaporizer.
It does contain nicotine for a satisfying transition.
Now, when I found Jewel, it was a complete game changer in my life.
I don't smoke any cigars any longer.
And Jewel was designed by smokers for smokers to be an alternative to whatever it is you're Smoking.
So if you're one of thirty-four million adults who do smoke cigars, cigarettes, pipe, whatever, well, there is an alternative to all of them.
Now to discover the smoking alternative, that's like nothing you've ever tried.
Just visit J-U-U-L.com slash switch America.
That's J-U-U-L.com slash switch America.
Now, warning, this product does contain nicotine, and nicotine is addictive.
So this information gotten by Judicial Watch is pretty devastating.
You got an August, you got Platte Rivers Network.
This goes back to December of 2014.
An email between redacted parties, quote, it's all part of the Hillary cover-up operation.
I'll have to tell you about it at the party.
Then an August 2015 email from Platte River Network says, so does this mean we don't have off-site backups currently?
Well, that could be a problem if someone hacks this thing and jacks it up.
We'll have to be able to produce a copy of it somehow, or we're going to be in deep.
And also, uh, whatever came of the guys at Dado about the old backups.
Do they have any way of getting those back after we were told to cut it to 30 days?
And in March of 2015, Platte Rivers Networks, again, the mom and pop shop bathroom closet server Hillary specifically discussed the security of the email server.
You know, redacted is going to send over a list of recommendations for us to apply for additional security against the hackers.
He did say that we should probably remove all Clinton files folders info off our servers on an independent drive.
Handwritten notes that appear to be from Platte Rivers Networks in February 2016 mentions questions concerning the Clinton email system and backups.
And the documents show that that Platte Rivers Networks used Bleachbit on the Clinton server.
The Bleach Bit program was downloaded from a vendor called Source Forge at 1142 AM, March 31st, 2015, according to a computer event law.
By the way, just as she's trying to run for president.
And over the next half hour, and that was used to delete the files on Hillary's server.
The documents also contain emails, handwritten notes in June and July of 2015 from the Office of Intelligence Community Inspector General discussing concerns over classified information.
Redacted sender from the State Department official Peggy Greyfeld that an inadvertent release of State Department Equities when the collection is released in its entirety, the potential damage to foreign relations of the United States could be significant.
Need you plugged in on this.
Now it gets worse.
You know, this is now June 27th, 2015.
Working with the inspector, I have personally reviewed hundreds of documents in the Hillary Rodham Clinton collection.
I can now say without reservation, there are literally hundreds of classified emails in this collection.
Maybe more.
For example, there were comments by department staff and emails related to WikiLeaks, unauthorized disclosures.
Many of the emails relating to this actually confirm the information in the disclosures.
The material is the subject of a Freedom of Information Act litigation, and emails will now have to be found, reviewed, upgraded.
Oh, I'm concerned about the inadvertent release of these equities, and this collection is released in its entirety.
It would damage national security.
All right, 25 now till the uh top of the well, what did I just say?
You know, if for the Jerusalem Post to come out as quickly as they did, um, okay.
Now we have both Prime Minister Netanyahu and his challenger claiming victory.
Uh there are mixed exit polls.
Oh, that's how reliable exit polls are.
So you have Channel 12 Israel has the as Lakud losing 3734 tied with the blocks meaning the right-left coalitions.
Um and by the way, they were wrong by six points in 2015.
Just in case history matters a little bit.
Uh, then you have Channel 10 has everybody tied 3636, but the right coalition is 60.
This is a parliamentary system.
It's very complicated.
There's uh there are so many different groups on the ballot.
Uh and tied between the blocks 6060.
If you get 6060, well, that means uh well, that would mean if B if it's TIE 3636, the Blue and White Party and Lakud, that means BB wins by a lot because that means the right versus left coalition in Israel will have won 6654.
That means BB will be Prime Minister again, which is what we want.
That's why they ran out there as quickly as they could.
Oh, he won four minutes after the exit right after the polls closed.
Four four minutes.
They just sound like Democrats here.
Now I have somebody that's really smart and important on the ground that has been there for all of these elections of Prime Minister Netanyahu, who just said, we're gonna win.
He says we have it.
So uh we'll be watching, just passing on information.
All right, so we've got all these other stories we're covering here.
We have Judicial Watch has been able to get these cover-up discussions as it relates to the Clinton email server, Platts Rivers Network.
I just read to you how they actually describe in detail the use of Bleachbit to erase, you know, that says, quote, document showing the use of Bleachbit on Clinton's server, and the Bleachbit program was downloaded from a vendor called SourceForge at 1142 a.m.
March 31st, 2015, according to the computer event log, and over the next half hour, they used Bleachbit to delete the files on Hillary's server.
Documents also containing emails, handwritten notes, uh written in June and July of 2015.
Now remember, 2015 is the primary season.
You know, everybody's out there trying to get into the debates, et cetera, et cetera.
Anyway, the redacted sender writes to a State Department official named Margaret Peggy Grefeld that the inadvertent release of the State Department's equities when this collection is released in its entirety, the potential damage to the foreign relations of the United States could be significant.
McCullough forwards the concern saying, well, you need uh need you plugged in on this.
All right, so then that's all sent June 27th now, 2015.
While working with the inspector, I have personally reviewed hundreds of documents in the Hillary Rodham Clinton collection, meaning in her off-site server, which is illegal.
I can now say without reservation, there are literally hundreds of classified emails in this collection, maybe more.
For example, there are comments by department staff in emails relating to the WikiLeaks, unauthorized disclosures.
Many of the emails relating to this actually confirm the information in the disclosures.
Now the material is subject to FOIA litigation, Freedom of Information Act litigation, and the emails will now have to be found, reviewed, and upgraded, and upgraded means, oh, oh, you're no longer classified.
And under the executive order 13526, it would be in our right to classify the entire Hillary Rodham Clinton collection at the secret level because of the mosaic effect.
So they want all of this was done by her illegally.
All of this was done to avoid congressional oversight.
And then it goes on to say, well, there may be inequal equities in this collection, including private classified information.
I'm very concerned about the inadvertent release of the State Department equities.
When this collection is released in its entirety, the potential damage to foreign relations of the United States could be significant.
This is interesting.
Now we have another email or to June 29th, 2015.
Need you plugged in on this.
Need to coordinate with state's WB person.
August 2015, classified Memo prepared by the FBI counterintelligence division regarding the findings with respect to Hillary's email server.
The FBI noted that the ICIG had found that in a sampling of over only 40 of Hillary's 30,000 emails, four classified emails were found out of 40.
A subsequent letter sent to Senator Richard Burr and to DNI director Clapper regarding the sample of Clinton emails noted that they were all classified at the secret level.
Okay, let me stop there.
That means she committed violated the Espionage Act.
That's a felony.
18 U.S. 3793.
And the FBI knew about it right here and then in 2015.
That's what this means.
Year later, they would exonerate her.
A year because we knew the investigation was rigged.
We now know that, according to the closed door testimony of Page and Strzok that they were saying as much.
Ha.
This is ridiculous.
They're all Democrats.
Of course she's getting off.
And she did.
And struck, it would be almost a year later before Peter Strzok interviewed her.
In the interim in May of 2016, remember, we're now in August of 2015.
In May of 2016, they began writing the exoneration.
Investigation had hardly begun of Hillary Clinton.
Comey even denied it.
So he's in trouble there.
Anyway, so they were able to take a small sampling.
Forty emails, four of the 40 had classified information on it.
In an August 2015 internal FBI memo, the FBI noted Hillary had signed a June 28, 2011 official correspondence advising all State Department employees, quote, due to recent targeting of personal email accounts by online adversaries, State Department employees should avoid conducting official department business from their personal email accounts.
So she knew that it was dangerous.
She did it anyway.
She just continued.
Same FBI memo noted that Under Secretary of State for Management Patrick Kennedy had sent a memo to all senior State Department officials on August 28th, 2014, including excerpts from the Foreign Affairs Manual.
It said classified information must be sent via classified email channels only.
That's another warning that she had, and she's giving out warnings.
And what Judicial Watch found is a lot of infighting between the Department of State and the Undersecretary Patrick Kennedy and the ICIG over the processing of potentially compromised Clinton email communications.
There's a June 15th, 2015 memo for the record prepared by the ICIG regarding the State Department review of Hillary's emails, indicating, among other things, that retired foreign service officers that the state was using to review Hillary's emails were not optimal.
Evaluation of other agencies' equities is not optimal.
State Department is currently relying on retired senior foreign service officers to review up for other agencies and for Freedom of Information Act requests.
For example, a review of the first set of 296 emails received from former Secretary Clinton and released to the State Department Freedom of Information Act website identified material that would have been referred to the IC.
Freedom of Information Act officials for review prior to release.
Recommendation recommend State Department FOIA office request staff support offices to assist with identification of intelligence community.
They wanted their own people in there to cover it up, is what that means.
That's what that means.
And they have the Freedom of Information Act personnel, you know, looking at this from the standpoint now of, oh, can we protect Hillary?
It's unclear whether the Department of Justice is reviewing the emails before FOIA release.
Former Secretary Clinton's emails are the subject of numerous FOIA requests, multiple FOIA lawsuits, and it may be prudent to integrate the Department of Justice into the FOI-year process review to ensure redactions can withstand potential legal challenges.
If not already being done, recommend State Department FOIA office incorporate the Department of Justice into the FOIA process to ensure the legal sufficiency review of FOIA exemptions and redactions.
Oh, they're talking about redactions too.
Fascinating.
And the FBI and State Department IG, Stephen Linick mentions an incident in May 13th, 2011.
228 a.m.
Uma Abdeen, Phil Rain.
Potential hack.
I guess that's Phil, I get whatever is uh Felipe Reigns, I guess.
Anyway, Clinton's IT technical technician, Brian Pagliano sent to Bill Clinton's aide, Justin Cooper, a bill indicating that on July 28, 29, 2012, that Pagliano had to address the issue of mailbox corruption of Hillary Clinton's email server, spending a total of 5.5 hours on the problem.
Other invoice items show he had to fix corruption in Justin Cooper's mailbox.
They have a conference call with the security team.
Block spammer with a Viagra message in this, and then it goes on from there.
And then they talked about clean up the virus from the BlackBerry profile, multiple brute force attacks against Hillary's server, requiring him to reset the password.
They got into the server, it was hacked.
Documents show Pagliano has paid 40 grand over four years to clean up that mess.
Pagliano repeatedly invoked his Fifth Amendment rights in a deposition with Judicial Watch.
Then you have a 2015 letter from the Secret Service to the counterintelligence division of the FBI addressing a request regarding preservation of records in connection with Clinton's email system.
Letter off also cites Judicial Watts litigation concerning preservation of her email records.
Secret Service writes that its searches did not reveal any responsive documents.
We already had done that.
And the National Archives request for information from the State Department.
And it goes on from there.
There's a November 2012 classified email from Jake Sullivan, Clinton's top policy advisor, discuss a report of arrest, possible Benghazi connection with her.
See how it's all interconnected.
That's why she never wanted to be on the system.
November 2015.
FBI dispatched special agents to Spain in Bahrain to conduct interviews in the mid-year exam regarding sensitive investigative matter.
David Kendall, Clinton's lawyer.
That's included in the letters.
Kendall writes the State Department Inspector General, I.G. that the State Department is in possession of Clinton's work-related emails.
He continues, Hillary's personnel.
We will continue to retain a preservation copy of the file containing electronic copies of those emails on a thumb drive that is stored in a secure safe at the offices of William and Connolly.
You get what's going on here?
And now uncovered a cover-up of records on the illicit Clinton email scandal system.
That's the whole point here.
And you get to, and I'll get into this in the next hour with Greg Jarrett and David Schoen, but now we have also today a full breakdown of the testimony behind closed doors of James Baker.
James Baker, we now know was arguing that in fact Hillary violated the espionage act, which did of all things, all days, we now have Judicial Watts report that confirms that.
They picked 40 emails randomly of the 33,000, and four of them had classified top secret information on them.
And then this effort, they literally described the time and the date the bleach bit was used.
But they protected her because they hated Trump and they wanted her to remain the candidate to be Trump.
That's why they used her phony dossier with Russian lies that she paid for.
That's why they backed door to spy on the Trump campaign, lying to and committing a fraud to the Pfizer court.
They didn't tell the Pfizer court that in fact Hillary paid for the Russian lies.
Bruce Orr warned everybody she paid for it.
It was not verified or corroborated, and that Christopher Steele hated Trump.
But yet it was still the bulk of information used in the Pfizer applications to get a backdoor into all things Trump world as part of an insurance policy to bludgeon him.
This is worse than I ever thought.
Do you realize what's coming out?
We're going to get 302s.
We are going to get gang of eight.
We're going to get more of these closed door testimonies.
We are going to get the FISA applications.
We are going to get the Inspector General report.
We're going to get John Uber's report.
And then we're going to get these criminal referrals from Devin Nunes.
Let me just tell you this.
They're going to jail.
The evidence is gathered.
It's just a matter of somebody smart enough to put it all together.
It's going to happen.
All right, when we come back, we're going to break down.
Just released closed door testimony.
The number one lawyer, the general counsel, the FBI under James Comey, Jim Baker, who thought Hillary should have been indicted for violating the Espionage Act, which by the way is obvious.
We'll continue.
All right, glad you're with us.
And write down our toll-free telephone number.
You want to be a part of the program.
Oh, I got to send a note to somebody.
Have been listen now.
There you go.
I got it out.
Anyway, 800 941.
Let me just go over what I was saying at the end of the last hour.
Now, we have a number of things that have come out today.
One, Judicial Watch uncovering the cover-up as it relates to the production of emails with the Clinton email server.
The battle to cover this up was as goes back far back as 2014, but mostly in 2015.
And they actually give the exact date that bleach bit was used to wash clean acid wash that hard drive because they wanted to get rid of it.
Now we have people within the FBI and Justice Department.
They just took a small sampling of some of the emails.
They took 40 out of 33,000, 30 some odd thousand.
Of the 44 they found have top secret classified information in it.
Mark classified.
And that's the clearest violation of the espionage act ever.
You know, you listen to the Democrats.
Well, okay, he might have been cleared a collusion, but you know, it was Barr and Rosenstein that made the decision on obstruction.
They don't care about obstruction of justice, because if they did, they would care about Hillary Clinton's conduct.
And to have obstruction of justice, you would need something called intent.
So when Hillary decided to erase the 33,000 subpoenaed emails and then acid wash the hard drive and beat up the devices with hammers and remove SIM cards, I think it's pretty clear the intent was to hide the evidence that she had violated the Espionage Act.
Okay, so they don't care about that.
Then today we have Doug Collins, Congressman Georgia.
He keeps releasing the closed door testimony.
We've got Strck and Page and Bruce Orr and Nelly Orr and a bunch of other people.
What's his name?
Precep.
Well, now we got James Baker's testimony today.
And it's very revealing.
We're going to go through the context of this and the contents of it in just a minute.
We've got Devin Nunes, who was on with me last night.
This week he will be releasing the first of what I believe and he believes to be a series of criminal referrals.
Now, Congressman Mark Meadows of the Freedom Caucus is their chairman, said more criminals referrals to come.
Certainly well deserved, overwhelming evidence showing multiple FBI DOJ executives abuse their power to undermine a duly elected president, and they will be held accountable.
This is just the beginning.
Now we have Bill Barr, the new attorney general.
He went before the Appropriations Committee today, supposedly, to talk about issues involving the budget of the Department of Justice, but he had a lot of questions about Mueller.
He He talked about the four things that would be redacted.
He thinks it'll be released in the next week.
For example, grand jury material.
That's illegal.
You must redact that in that report.
You can't release that.
You can't release sources and methods in the intelligence community.
That would be a bad idea.
Ongoing investigation.
That would be a bad idea.
And he went on to say that it would be released to the public within a week.
And he also said that there has been no call for executive privilege up to this point.
Well, they have the right to do that.
Um anyway, let's go to the transcript of, and this I think is really interesting of James Baker.
James Baker is the top lawyer at the FBI under Jim Comey.
And he admits that he was arguing with everybody else why Hillary Clinton, in fact, should have been indicted.
Joining us is the author of the bestseller, The Russia Hoax, the illicit scheme to clear Hillary Clinton, frame Donald Trump.
He's proven more right every day.
Greg Jarrett and David Schoen, criminal defense and civil liberties attorney.
Welcome both of you.
Uh all right, let's start with Barr and of course this testimony that was released.
This is important what I'm reading of James Baker's closed door testimony.
Oh, it is, because it lends sustenance to the notion that this was a political move by the FBI to clear Hillary Clinton.
Baker determined initially that she committed crimes.
And he argued vociferously until James Comey and Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, and then the Department of Justice told him no, we're not going to prosecute.
We're setting a brand new standard that we are inventing that does not exist in the law, an intense standard for gross negligence.
And so it's abundantly clear from his testimony the fix was in to clear Clinton.
Add one other point, and that was Page and Strzok's testimony behind closed doors that was revealed thanks to Doug Collins.
And we learned in that case, we're not making any decisions.
All of these decisions on Hillary are being made by the Attorney General Loretta Lynch, and we all know that they're Hillary supporters, and nothing's gonna happen.
Lisa Page said every decision they made in the Hillary Clinton case was being dictated to them by Loretta Lynch's Department of Justice in the Obama administration.
And but Peter Strzok said the same thing.
Yeah.
Um beyond that, by the way, you have that side of the equation.
You have all of the unbelievable things that were done, decisions made with respect to Hillary Clinton.
But what Baker's testimony also gives you is the other side of the equation uh as to the complete anti-Trump bias that was going on around the office.
Part of the some of the things that are so important in his testimony are uh his disc description of the mood around the department that so many higher ups were concerned that the firing of Comey could constitute obstruction of justice, let alone any you know separation of power uh arguments never occurred to them, um, or that Comey served with the president's discretion.
Um and beyond that, we know from Baker now that there was serious talk about the invocation of this 25th amendment, this absolute circus idea uh to get rid of Donald Trump, that the taping of the uh president uh was a real thought, and this was all discussed by McCabe and and others, and uh and that it was a serious thing, despite what Rod Rosenstein now says.
He talks about Clinton election bias.
He's asked a very important question, I think, uh, about on the face of it, it appeared that there was some language that could be interpreted very pro-one candidate.
This is the question to James Baker.
Very anti another candidate, that would be biased that you took the initiative, it's my understanding, to request the FBI's internal inspection mechanisms, take a look at the mid-year case, the Hillary case, to see what might be right with it, wrong with it.
Could you elaborate?
Uh that's something we haven't heard a whole lot about.
And he said, Yeah, I'm looking at the inspector general report right now in front of me, and there's discussion in there.
So when I heard about those texts, meaning struck and page, I only read a few of them.
Uh They were described to me, and I became immediately quite alarmed.
And so my thinking was well, from you know, okay, I don't know.
I know that.
I knew that.
Inspector General was looking at him, but I knew they would address them.
And so I knew that there was a process in place where that where he goes on to say, and what I was concerned about is whether any decision had been taken or not taken in the mid-year case and whether they were driven by political bias of any sort.
I was quite worried about it.
I wanted to make sure that we as an institution, the Bureau as an institution got on top of this extremely quickly.
I suggested the leadership, former committee, sensitive sensitive sensitive.
So he saw what was the favoring of one candidate over another.
Oh, absolutely.
And and you know, Baker's testimony is blockbuster.
It reveals not only pro-Hillary Clinton bias at the FBI and the Department of Justice to absolve her of the many crimes she committed.
But also that in the Russian investigation of Donald Trump, that it too was being driven by this hate Trump bias uh in the media exhibited uh i i at the FBI, rather, exhibited by Peter Strzok and Lisa Page's text.
It was abnormal.
Protocols were not being followed.
And I must tell you that the headline for me today from William Barr is that he testified he will and is personally reviewing the Trump Russia investigation, the origin of it, and the conduct of the people involved,
meaning James Comey, Andrew McKay, Peter Strzok, Lisa Pays, James Baker, as well as the five individuals at the Department of Justice who signed off on this phony wiretap warrant lying to the court.
I mean what's your I mean what w what are you say to that, uh David?
I mean, and then you add to the fact that he was asked very specifically whether or not he thought Hillary and her campaign committed a crime on the email server.
He said yes.
And then did nothing about it, quite frankly.
This man was general counsel at the FBI.
Um very high important uh responsibility.
He had an obligation that if he saw action had to be taken and no action were taken, he had to go to the attorney general.
The attorney general wouldn't act.
At a minimum, he had to report this to the inspector general at the time, but he probably had an obligation uh to go even to the president.
Um maybe uh uh to go someplace else.
He had an obligation to affirmatively act uh in this case.
He could go to Congress.
He could go to Congress, absolutely.
There's an oversight um opportunity to go to there.
That door is open, but he didn't.
And so that speaks volumes, but again, it's part of this atmosphere.
It was this hate Trump and playing politics in the Department of Justice like we've never seen, and carried to its full extension.
What some clearly had in mind was for the first time that I'm aware of in history, this attempted coup, an actual attempted coup in this use of the 25th amendment, and Baker says it was serious talk.
And you know, one step further, there are whistleblower statutes in place to protect somebody like Baker.
He can go to Congress, he can blow the whistle on the corruption at the FBI and the Department of Justice.
He has a legal obligation, his general counsel to do that.
He would be protected, he didn't do it, which makes him complicit in the corruption.
Right?
Doesn't that you agree with that?
Oh, uh absolutely.
I mean, that's we had the obligation to do it, and he didn't do it.
Um listen, this the opportunity to have Mr. Barr in there is what you know, people have said they've been waiting for here.
They uh there was nobody at the helm before.
It's his obligation now to take these things seriously and to take seriously referrals from Congress.
Mr. Nunes and others have thought carefully about uh who to refer and why to refer them, and they backed it all up with evidence.
No one's guessing here about what happened.
It has to be investigated.
And Barr will do it.
I am absolutely confident this is just the second time he said he will do it.
So you think now this is a whole new ball game.
It is totally new ball game.
Barr is an honest and honorable man who cares deeply about the rule of law, and when he says, give me the predicate, the reasons, the facts, the evidence to launch a full scale investigation of alleged corruption at the FBI and the Department of Justice.
I believe he will do it.
All right, we'll take a quick break.
We'll come back with more on this.
We got Devin Nunes.
Well, that means we've got criminal referrals coming this week.
Okay.
Everyone's going to get the full Mueller report.
That's coming within a week.
Then we've got a cascade of information that we will be getting more closed door testimony, like this blockbuster testimony we got from James Baker today, like Struck and Paige that we've already had.
Uh many more people.
Then we've got the 302s, we got the FISA applications, we got Gang of Aid information.
Uh on top of that, you've got the Inspector General Horowitz, his investigation into Pfizer abuse, and whatever John Uber is doing, I guess is anybody's guess at this point, supposedly looking into leaking, but you know, nobody's heard from him in months.
I don't know if he's maybe on a sabbatical.
We're waiting breathlessly for his report.
All right, as we continue.
All right, so we got criminal referrals, Mueller report coming, gang of eight, 302s, Pfizer applications, and uh now we're getting more and more of these depositions and the Freedom of Information Act requests.
This information, though, today, between Barr's testimony and the James Baker testimony that was released by Congressman Collins.
I'm looking at this and he's basically saying, Yeah, I I had to argue with the FBI, and I'm the I'm the general counsel, the top FBI lawyer about how Hillary broke the law.
He knew she broke the law.
He knew the statute.
Uh, and he knew that uh Loretta Lynch and Obama were forcing the DOJ to instruct the FBI to ignore the law and create a new legal standard to exonerate Hillary Clinton.
Isn't it interesting, Sean, that almost every day, new information emerges that uh that tells us more and more about the level of corruption that took place here.
That's how cover-ups work.
The evidence is slow to emerge.
And what are your thoughts on on the fact that all of this was able to take place and everybody at the high le highest levels of the FBI knew, for example, about the Hillary bought and paid for uh, you know, Russian dossier, and that they used it, they all knew that that was not a valid document.
It was unverifiable.
Uh, David Schoen.
It should be shocking to absolutely everyone.
And by the way, uh, this stuff was only uncovered through your offices, quite frankly.
And we're only starting to get the information, I think.
You want to know an even scarier thought?
Uh, an earlier FBI general counsel with Andrew Weissman.
Can you imagine if he had been general counsel here, as bad as Baker was?
Um, and maybe that's what set the tone over there and got the message around.
I want to say one last thing, if I may, about the Barr testimony.
Congressman Nather is pulling a scam on the American public by positioning this thing as if Barr or anyone else is trying to withhold something unduly from him.
He keeps writing these letters and saying these generalities that Congress is always entitled to this and has gets sensitive uh information all the time.
There's a fundamental principle in the law that the specific statute overrides the other.
This report by statute is to be kept confidential.
Or read more of this on the other side.
We'll continue.
All right, 25 till the uh top of the hour, 800-941 Sean.
If you want to be a part of the program.
All right, let's stay on this testimony that's been going on with uh Bill Barr, the attorney general.
Uh first, he's saying that the Mueller report will be released in a week.
I'll play that for you.
Um he goes over in detail the four areas of the Mueller report which will be redacted, um, which I think is important.
He, you know, goes on to say and talk about, which I thought was very key that the Horowitz FISA investigation should be done by May or June.
That that's important.
And remember, we have the criminal referrals on top of this.
He makes a point of saying uh that whoever leaked the FISA order against Carter Page, he said, you know, if there's a a predicate for an investigation, it will be conducted.
He wouldn't answer whether or not the White House has seen the Mueller report, and that and he's testifying on the fact that uh he has no plans, meaning the President, the executive branch, to claim executive privilege on any part of the Mueller report.
So let me let me just bring you up to speed.
It got dramatic at times today.
Um by the way, he also acknowledged that he can't release the full Mueller report because of a recent court decision.
Which, by the way, this is what the Democrats wanted.
Let's not forget, after the Ken Starr report, they got rid of the independent counsel for that reason.
All right, let me let's play this.
This process is going along uh very well.
And uh my original timetable uh of being able to release this uh uh uh by mid-April stands.
And so I I think that uh from my standpoint, uh by the by uh within a week, uh I will be in a position to release the report to the public, and then I will uh engage with the chairman of both judiciary committees about that report and about any further requests that they have.
But I am uh relying on my own discretion uh to make as much uh public as I can.
Now, in my letter of the March 29th, I identified four areas that I feel should be redacted, and I think most people would agree.
The first is grand jury information, 6E material.
The second is information that the ICE, the intelligence community believes would reveal intelligence sources and methods.
The third uh are information in the report that could interfere with ongoing prosecutions.
You will recall that uh the special counsel did spin off a number of cases that are still being pursued, and we want to make sure that none of the information in the report would impinge upon either the ability of the prosecutors to prosecute the cases or the fairness to the defendants.
And finally, uh uh we uh intend to redact information uh that implicates the privacy or reputational interests of peripheral players where there is a decision not to charge them.
Uh right now, the special counsel is working with us on identifying information in the reports that fall under those four categories.
Uh my question is now that President Trump has been exonerated of Russia conclusion, is the Justice Department investigating how it came to be that your agency used a salacious and unverified dossier as a predicate uh for a FISA order on a U.S. citizen?
The office uh of the Inspector General has a pending investigation of the FISA process in in the Russian investigation, and I expect that that will be complete in probably in May or June, I am told.
So hopefully we'll have some answers from uh Inspector General Horowitz on the issue of the FISA warrants.
More generally, uh I am reviewing the conduct of the investigation and trying to get my arms around all the aspects of the uh counterintelligence investigation that was conducted during the summer of 2016.
Are you investigating who leaked the existence of the FISA order against quarter page?
Uh who what?
Uh are you are you investigating who leaked the existence of a FISA order against quarter page?
Uh I haven't seen the referrals yet from uh Congressman Nunez, but obviously if if there's a predicate for an investigation, it will be conducted.
Did the White House see the report before you released your summarizing letter?
Has the White House seen it since then?
Have they been briefed on the contents beyond what was in your summarizing letter to the Judiciary Committee?
Um I've said what I'm gonna say about the report today.
Uh I've uh issued three letters about it, and I'm I was willing to discuss uh the historic information of how the report came to me in my decision on Sunday.
But I've already laid out the process that is going forward uh To release these reports uh hopefully uh within a week, and I'm not gonna say anything more about it until the report is out and everyone has a chance to look at it.
Are you going to claim that you have a right to withhold any of that report based on a so-called claim of executive privilege?
Well, the any claim of executive privilege would have to be asserted by the president.
And he the president said, as I said in my letter, which sort of speaks for itself, uh, he has said that he's leaving the decisions up to me.
Okay.
Are you going to claim executive privilege to keep any of that report back?
Uh as I said, there's no plan.
I have no plan to do that.
Okay.
Um do you believe that executive privilege applies to any broader uh range of communications and specific direct communications from the president?
Uh you know, I would I would have to review the latest opinions from OLC about the precise scope of it, but it's not relevant to me right now.
And as far as you know, does it apply to any uh communications by the president uh before he was president?
As I say, uh I'm not sure what the learning is in the Department of Justice on that.
And quick question about subpoena.
I'm not on the Judiciary Committee.
My understanding is though they've issued a subpoena to you to um release the full report.
Um would that put you in violation of federal law?
In the current situation, I don't think I have the latitude to release 6E material.
As to the other categories, as I said, I'm I'm willing to discuss those with the judiciary committees.
I I want to satisfy try to accommodate and satisfy their interests, but at the same time, uh uphold the law.
And right now, and there's been a recent case decided in the District of Columbia, just I think within the last week on this, the 6E material is not releasable.
All right, as we continue, uh that was Bill Barr from earlier today, and um well, we'll have more as the show continues.
It's it's look, it's happening in real time as we've been saying, so uh glad you're with us.
Let's get to uh some of our calls here.
I know a lot of you have been very patient.
Uh Penny is in Virginia.
Penny, hi, how are you?
Glad you called.
Hi.
Um, you know, in in listening to all of the Democrat candidates put out there these crazy, ridiculous, very socialist ideas.
I believe that the Democrat Party doesn't expect any of these candidates to have a chance at winning against Donald Trump.
But they're all throwing themselves, they're sacrificing themselves on on the the you know, on the spike of these crazy ideas because that moved the whole socialist ball forward.
Listen, you see a party now that has lost all touch with the American people.
And I mean, on a new level of extremism, I I never really thought they'd be this transparent and this obvious.
For whatever reason, you now have all of these states now fighting for during birth abortion.
I mean, it's it's nuts.
And you know, all this support of the new Green Deal, which is real for them.
You know, all of these radical moves.
Let's let felon votes felons vote in prison.
You know, let let's let's go to the electoral college and get rid of that so New York, California, New Jersey, and Illinois can pick all of our presidents, because that's what's going to happen exactly what our framers warned about, and exactly what they purposefully avoided to have a United States of America.
You know, let let's let's also stack the Supreme Court, but only when we get the chance to do it.
Now there's ways they can do these things, but you know, remember, they want this for them is all about power.
That's it.
It's it's not about they they are not legislating in a way that is benefiting the American people.
The greatest strength of Donald Trump as we now begin a process heading into 2020 is his success.
If it's Biden who's, you know, at or near the top, uh Biden still has a record to run on on on top of his insane statements and his creepy behavior.
And then, of course, the corruption, as we have been pointing out with Ukraine and his son and him bragging about getting the prosecutor that was investigating his son fired by leveraging American tax dollars in the process.
And then, of course, the money With China, son flying on Air Force Two of them to China.
All of these issues will be vetted.
The American people will understand them as deeply as this audience does before all is said and done.
It gets out.
It takes a while, a little bit of repetitiveness needed at times to get there.
Anyway, good call.
Appreciate it, Penny.
Thank you.
All right, quick break.
Welcome back.
More of your calls uh straight ahead and our news roundup information overload.
Some of the other issues we've been missing today.
All right, as we continue back to our busy phones.
Uh as we say hi to Jonathan as in Austin.
Jonathan, hi, how are you?
Glad you called.
Hey, hey, Sean.
I'm great.
Thank you very much.
Thanks for having me on.
What's going on?
Hey, listen, so I was calling about uh the Strk Page insurance policy and how that ties into the FISA warrant from the Unholy 16.
Um so you know, they they kept talking about this insurance policy that they had, and I saw Michael Caputo on Fox a couple of weeks ago, and he was talking about how he was approached by a Russian asset that was a 17-year FBI informant.
And it made me start thinking he was actually approached by him in May.
And he said there were at least a do other dozen other FBI informants or Russian assets that were approaching people in the Trump campaign.
This is before you know the investigation started or anything.
And I started thinking, why in the world would you go to the trouble to uh get a FISA warrant and and doctor up a dossier and all this stuff if you didn't know darn well what you were going to find?
And I think what they were hoping was they were going to trap the Trump campaign people to accepting information from these Russian assets.
So then when the FISA warrant shows up and they go, Ah, we know what we're looking for, and lo and behold, we found it because we put it there.
But the problem is the Trump people didn't bite, and then they lost their minds, right?
Because there was nothing there to find because they weren't accepting false information or Russian things doing that.
A lot of people don't understand the nature of these campaigns, you know, Jonathan, and I've now been through so many of these cycles.
I I I'm there, I see it, I watch it, and you know, the best way to describe it is organized chaos where everybody for weeks and months at a time are gulping water.
You know, during you know, and you go through different stages where things might calm down a little bit, but for example, as you head into the primaries, you go from one primary one state to the next day to the next day to the next day, to the and you're just flying all over the place, and then you got to follow the news and you gotta react to attacks, and you're constantly sort of re uh there's a reconfiguration of messaging and and what's working, what's not working.
So there's not a whole lot of time, and you know, if you go back to the Trump Tower meeting, the Magnitsky Act, um, that was a setup too.
You mentioned the setup, because we remember the woman that came in came in under false pretenses.
It really was an issue about Russian adoption.
But there were two meetings with Fusion GPS one before and after.
A coincidence.
And what Michael Caputo says, and he said this, and I haven't heard on the air since then, and I'm not wildly surprised about it, but what he said was he knew of at least a dozen other, and he named he named names, uh, you know, specifically um of of people that were approaching that were all FBI assets.
And again, I'm not talking about the rank and file FBI people, right?
We're talking about the you know, the unholy 16 or whatever you want to call them, right?
The the sour 16s, whatever you want to call them.
But, you know, I I can't believe that this, and look, maybe it is in the Mueller report, right?
I mean, or the inspector general's report to go there was some really shady stuff going on because you can't go plant evidence and then you know, go through all the trouble of a dossier unless you're feeling pretty confident that Hillary's gonna get elected and nobody's gonna know about it.
Let me tell you something, and this is the important aspect of all of this is there was Russia collusion.
There was Russian lies bought and paid for by one candidate, and first this candidate was protected.
She should have been indicted, as we now know, as all of these now closed door testimonies come in.
She was protected, and she had committed crimes.
You want you know, all the Democrats that cry obstruction, uh, even though there was none and there no intent.
We know what Hillary's intent was when she uh deleted an acid washed or hard drive.
There's no ambiguity on that at all.
And then the Russian dossier, and that information was disseminated and leaked to members of the media so it would influence American voters.
And it was used to bludgeon the Trump campaign and spy on them by getting to Carter Page.
And then it was used afterwards as an insurance policy.
Uh Add to that, the Ukrainians, they they want to give us the evidence of real collusion to help Hillary Clinton.
Nobody cares about that.
Just like they only care about sexual assault if it's uh a Republican, they can bludge it.
Not the victims, alleged victims of the lieutenant governor of the great state or Commonwealth of Virginia.
First one is Pfizer abuse and other matters.
We believe there was a conspiracy to lie to the Pfizer court, mislead the Pfizer court uh by numerous individuals that all need to be investigated and looked at.
Uh, that uh and we believe the statute is is the conspiracy statute.
The second conspiracy one is uh involving manipulation of intelligence.
Uh that also could install uh many Americans.
And we are so that's kind of the second one.
Uh as you know, we've had a lot of concerns with the way intelligence was used.
Uh so that that would be uh kind of the two conspiracy uh recommendations, referrals that were that we're making.
The third uh is what I would call a global leak uh referral.
Uh my question is now that President Trump has been exonerated of Russia coll conclusion, is the Justice Department investigating how it came to be that your agency used a salacious and unverified dossier as a predicate uh for a FISA order on a U.S. citizen.
The office uh of the inspector general has a pending investigation of the FISA process in in the Russian investigation, and I expect that that will be complete in probably in May or June, I am told.
So hopefully we'll have some answers from uh Inspector General Horowitz on the issue of the FISA warrants.
More generally more generally, uh I am reviewing the conduct of the investigation and trying to get my arms around all the the aspects of the uh counterintelligence investigation that was conducted during the summer of 2016.
Are you investigating who leaked the existence of the FISA order against Carter Page?
Uh who what?
Uh are you uh are you investigating who leaked the existence of a FISA order against Carter Page?
Um I haven't seen the the referrals yet from uh Congressman Nunez, but obviously if if there's a predicate for an investigation, it'll be conducted.
All right, that was first Evan Dunez and the attorney general appearing before Congress uh earlier today, given his testimony and all this.
We also have the release, and it's very revealing of the transcript of the top FBI lawyer uh during the Clinton Trump Russia investigations.
That would be James Baker, uh, who in this closed door testimony expresses a lot of concerns about all the political bias, and he had been the one person that thought that, yeah, Hillary probably should have been indicted for the espionage act.
Now Kimberly Strassel is with us, uh, authored journalist, member of the Wall Street Journal editorial board.
She writes a weekly conservative column, uh Potomac Watch, uh, every Friday in the Wall Street Journal, one of the leading voices and investigators in all of this.
Uh Kimberly, thanks for being with us.
How are you?
It's I'm great.
It's great to be here, Sean.
Let's start with Devin Nunes.
Um, and it actually gets deeper than that.
Mark Meadows talked about the criminal referrals and how they will show an overwhelming uh amount of evidence on FBI abuse and Barr saying today that, well, maybe as early as May, we're gonna get the inspector general report.
Uh we know there was Pfizer abuse.
We know they never told the Pfizer court judges that Hillary paid for it.
We know the information was not verified because it was unverifiable because its own author, Christopher Steele, he he couldn't say under oath whether any of it was true, and maybe 50-50 his words.
And we know uh that uh in the the particular case of presenting it to the court that they withheld the information that was critical, and if you can't verify it, you can't present it.
And that would mean that they committed a fraud on the Pfizer court, and I would imagine some people are in deep trouble over that.
Well, it's just great news overall that Congressman Nunes is doing this because a lot of us wondered last year they had all of these interviews, obviously, most of them were done behind closed doors.
We couldn't see what they were, but the point was where is all of this going?
Well, now they we know there's new leadership at the Department of Justice.
That's something that's been lacking there.
We didn't have someone in charge who had the ability to look at all of this given that Jeff Sessions had had to recuse.
Now we've got a new cop on the block.
They're gonna send over these referrals.
The Attorney General has already expressed his willingness to look at that, and as he said, if there's a predicate for investigation, he will move on them.
Some of these I am told are very straightforward, like the lying to Congress ones and the leaking ones, there will be evidence in these referrals that will be hard to ignore and hard to not bring a case against someone.
The conspiracy charges, that's a little bit more of an uncharted territory, but it is certainly an opportunity for the House members to present everything they have to Barr, who has himself finally expressed some interest, we finally have interest to look into this and investigate.
Well, what did you think of the Attorney General's testimony today?
He says sometime probably uh but in a week he's gonna release this with uh with obvious redactions.
I mean, it was so funny that that uh you have the cowardly Schiff, Adam Schiff, who I think has lied many times to the American people.
I would love the four hours of airtime that I've offered him, three on radio and one on TV.
I'll take Gerald Nadler too.
I'll take anybody, any of these people that want to come.
Uh, because we have our dossier on him, including a tape of him colluding with a Russian hoaxer, thinking he's getting information that would disrupt the political process in the U.S. Um, but as I listened to Mr. Barr, and I you know, it sounds to me like everything that he wrote in his letter is true, and that basically there was no collusion.
Now that is confirmed four times.
And on top of that, there is no obstruction.
There was no intent, no evidence of obstruction.
And this has been a two-year lying campaign by the news media and the Democratic Party to destroy a duly elected president.
Yeah, the takeaway from the Barr testimony is that he just completely destroyed this whole new democratic claim of some cover-up that has happened here, which is the only thing they were left with after the Mueller report came out, and they didn't get their collusion findings and they didn't get their obstruction charges.
But Barr was, I thought pretty masterful today in destroying that in that, you know, he said, Look, we've been working with the special counsel for a long time.
Uh, there's been oversight.
This was not necessarily a surprise what was coming.
That was how we were able to put this letter out so quickly.
Moreover, I gave the special counsel the opportunity to review the letter, and he chose not to.
Uh, all of which suggests that he probably didn't because he knew that what Mueller uh what Barr was putting out there was completely straightforward.
The findings are pretty straightforward.
So, and he's also, you know, he pointed out we're going to have these redactions.
I'm gonna color code them so that you can see exactly why we're taking out what we need to do.
I'm also not gonna go and at least not now and ask for these kind of crazy requests that you guys have asked for, Democrats, to have a grand jury actually sign off or a judge sign off on releasing grand jury testimony, which is just an opportunity for Democrats to smear a lot of private citizens who testified.
You know, if you stay focused, though, on the issue of okay, the FBI did their own nine-month investigation, even struck and page acknowledged there was no evidence of any Trump campaign Russia collusion.
But the special counsel was appointed anyway.
Now, how that happened, I believe that James Comey potentially violated the law by leaking classified information, government documents.
I think that is a problem.
Uh and more so, how did James Comey sign off?
If if the Grassley Graham memo was accurate on the dossier that was bought and paid for by Hillary, never verified, how did he sign off on that in October 2016 and then go to Trump Tower to meet with President elect Trump in January of 2017 and say it's unverified and salacious?
Wouldn't he have to have been saying to the FISA court that he's verified it?
Doesn't that mean that either he lied to the court or lied to the president elect?
Well, what you're putting your finger on here, Sean, and I think it is the vital question is how early on did everyone at the FBI know that this dossier had been bought and paid for by the rival campaign.
How much discussion was there that about that and how much were they aware that what they were doing was inappropriate.
And in your opening you mentioned the testimony that we're just publicly seeing today from the former general counsel James Baker and they were highly aware that this was an explosive uh thing to be using um and that this is why this gets to why we ended up having the obscured language that they used in the FISA warrant.
I'm told that not only did they we know that they obscured that but in addition what did they not put in to that FISA warrant exculpatory evidence that they may have had in their hands at that point which would have argued against going forward with surveillance of American citizens.
That's also an obligation of the FBI and I think we've got a lot to learn yet about what Mr. Comey exactly knew and how he could justify any of this.
During his testimony and this is the testimony released by Congressman Collins today from with James Baker the the general counsel the the number one attorney for the FBI under Comey uh Baker described in the case of Hillary's emails uh her behavior in general as alarming and appalling and argued with others uh about why they thought she shouldn't be charged.
Now ultimately they won out but the reality is is that we'd know she had classified top secret special access programming information marked as such on that private server in a mom and pop bathroom closet.
So that would be a crime and and with all the talk about whether or not the president obstructed uh if you have subpoenaed emails Kimberly and you happen to delete them some 33,000 of them and then you acid wash the hard drive so anything that might be remaining on that hard drive is gone and you have an aide bust up your devices with hammers in case those emails transferred over to those devices and you pull out the SIM cards I don't think there's a greater case for obstruction of justice I could ever make in my life.
Well let's hope and that the Attorney General Mr Barr decides to actually take a look back at the way the DOJ conducted itself and FBI during that entire investigation too.
He's been more quiet on that front but a review of those procedures I think is absolutely warranted.
And in particular I mean you're mentioning the obstruction charge against Hillary but there were other things that were just really eyebrow raising throughout all of that.
I mean to this day for instance you can go look at testimony that other Hillary Clinton aides gave to the FBI and remember as we're constantly told it is a crime to lie to the FBI but they gave testimony that is completely counterindicated contradicted by emails that the FBI had in its possession and made public.
So you can just go look at that black and white situation right there.
Clearly they were not treated in the same way that the FBI treats other people and I I think that that's a concern when I go out and talk to people their feeling that there is unequal justice at the moment is one of the biggest issues for them and that has to be a question that William Barr addresses at the top of DOJ.
Let me ask you now that we are getting closed door testimony uh the president when I interviewed him last week said yes we will be getting the FISA applications.
We will be getting Gang of Eight information.
We will be getting, again, once they are ready for clearance, we will be getting the 302s, the interviews, for example, of Bruce Orr and Christopher Steele and others, and all this closed-door testimony.
So there was a narrative now that has gone on for over two years, almost three, about Trump-Russia collusion.
But yet we've discovered that one candidate had a rigged investigation, was never, ever going to be indicted.
We know that candidate violated numerous laws and obstructed justice.
We know that there was a Russian dossier paid for by one candidate.
That dossier, everybody was warned that it was not verified, and Clinton paid for it, but they still used it as the basis for a FISA warrant.
We know that the bulk of the information of the FISA warrant was the dossier.
And then we also have this little issue with the Ukrainians and Joe Biden, and they were trying to help Hillary Clinton and this...
there seems no interest in their influence in the 2016 election.
What happened in your view?
Well, I think the first thing we're going to learn, Sean, when we finally see these documents, and it's overdue, is that the entire FBI line about how this unrolled is is going to be proved to be untrue.
So remember, they but they have said this to all of their friends in the media for years and said, Well, it this all happened in July 31st, 2016.
That was official start of our CI investigation, cross-fire hurricane, and it all happened because we were concerned about George Papadopoulos and one line he said in London in the spring, which was always the thinnest of reads in my mind that you could ever put forward as a justification.
I think we're gonna find out when we see these documents that that this investigation started much, much earlier than that, and that the FBI was interacting with all kinds of shady characters early on who were feeding them other claims, even in addition to the dossier that was all designed to get this Trump Russia collusion narrative flowing before the election.
Do you believe as I do that many of the names that I uh we have both talked about for the last two years?
Do you believe those people will be indicted?
Because I do.
I think some of them will be.
Uh uh, but it's unclear if all of them will be.
Um, you know, look, I think one thing we also have to acknowledge is that some of the things that they did were utter abuses of power and completely inappropriate, but whether or not they rise to the level of crime is a different question, which is why we need to know what happened so that we might even change the law to make sure there are consequences in future.
Well, we better hold them accountable or else they'll try and unseat other presidents and influence other elections and abuse of power again.
All right, Kimberly Strasso, Wall Street Journal, thank you.
800 941 Sean.
When we come back, wide open telephones as we continue on this busy breaking news day.
We'll have all the coverage tonight on Hannity 9 Eastern.
All right, 25 down till the top of the hour, toll-free.
Our number is 800, 941 Sean.
If you want to be a part of this extravaganza.
One thing that I am very intrigued about and concerned about.
You know, it drives me nuts.
I don't know why we as a government, the United States, we see, and Blair's the computer expert here, so maybe we should be asking him, but we see this ability of people to now hack into agencies in our government.
I mean, the one one of the untold stories about Hillary's email server was that Hillary, you know, we we they thought, I'm sure it happened, that six foreign intelligence services hacked into that email server system.
Yeah, put your mic on.
Hang on.
And so what bothers me is now the hacking is so big, so common, they're so good at it, and it's a different kind of warfare.
I mean, there they are now there the ability of people.
Now we have known this for decades, that there is a vulnerability within our governmental systems.
People have hacked into NASA, people have hacked into the DOD, people have hacked into the State Department.
Um all of that, you know, we we need safety and security because this is about our national defense.
And then you take it to another level, and you have this incident that happened down at Mar-a-Lago, a Chinese national, was able to bluff her way into Mar-a-Lago carrying a thumb drive loaded with malware and a trove of other spy gear.
The FBI is now investigating whether this this woman, Yu Jing Zhang, 33, is an agent of the Chinese government.
It would appear that she is.
By all accounts, she lies to everyone she encounters, according to the assistant U.S. attorney Rolando Garcia said at the bond hearing in West Palm Beach uh yesterday, her ties are all in China.
She was busted at the Mar-a-Lago Club after giving conflicting reasons as to why she was even there during one of the president's weekend visits.
President was golfing at the time.
Two days earlier, she had arrived in Newark, New Jersey on a flight from Shanghai and entered the country on a B-1 business visa.
Zhang also told investigators she was an investor and consultant in China who they hoped to promote Chinese American business relations while at Mar-a-Lago.
She said she was a successful, uh successful in China, claiming to own a one point three million dollar home and a BMW there.
But authorities said that she lied shortly after arriving.
First, she told the Secret Service agents protecting the property that she was a guest headed for a swim at the pool, even though she was wearing a long gray dress and had no swimsuit with her, officials alleged.
And then her friendly manager eventually helped wave her through, noting that Zhang's last name, which is extremely common, also matched the name of an older male club member.
So it was actually a staff member at Marilogo that did this, not the Secret Service.
Zhang was then shuttled in a golf cart further into the resort.
She went through a second Secret Service security checkpoint where agents used a magnetometer to screen her for weapons and explosives, and she was taken to the club's main reception area, and that's where she made her fatal mistake.
And that time she told the receptionist that she was at the resort to attend a United Nations Chinese American Association event.
Problem was there was no such event scheduled, and the worker alerted Secret Service and they began questioning her, and her story fell apart.
She was arrested, and they eventually found this trove of items she had with her in her room at a nearby hotel.
She was carrying, let's see, four five cell phones in total, two Chinese passports, a device that detects hidden cameras, a thumb drive that is loaded with malware, nine other thumb drives, five SIM cards, a laptop, an external hard drive, all these credit and debit cards, eight thousand dollars in U.S. cash and seven hundred dollars in Chinese currency.
Now the question is, you know, how did this happen?
I don't I mean, how easy how many times have people tried to hack into everything that I have?
Today.
Today.
Uh thousands.
Thousands of times today.
Yeah.
They just probe ports that are open on your website.
They search, you know, they just they fish for things.
It's called fishing, fishing attacks.
Well, fishing means they want you to click on something.
Right.
There's fishing attacks, which things called watering hole attacks, where they set up this fake website that you go to, you enter your username and password, and then they take it and they try to use that on Hannity or use it on your email to try to catch you.
And that's classic.
Yeah.
And how many times how how many do you think we've had since the beginning of the year?
Oh, hundreds of thousands.
Well, that do you notice them every time?
We we have services in place that automatically stop known, you know, why can't the government I look if the government has, I read once, 250,000 IT people.
How come we're still vulnerable the way we are?
Because a lot of it's a it's a human problem.
You know, someone someone goes out and they they check their email or they click on an email or they're you know, 94% of all malware is from email.
So, you know, they click on this and they give their username and password.
It's not it's not a it's not a hack.
It's it's it's a human problem.
Pretty amazing.
Uh some of the other news we haven't gotten to yet.
Jason, I know you want to weigh in on some of this.
We now have well, there's a prosecutor that wrote a piece anonymously after Kim Fox recently attempted to deflect the criticism of her handling of the Justice Smolette case, insinuating that her critics were motivated by racism.
Anyway, this letter was published on the website of uh CWB Chicago, a Chicago prosecutor speaks out against Fox and her demoralizing attacks on law enforcers in the state law enforcement and the state's attorney office in Chicago and goes really just tears her to shreds.
Now, in that case, look, I believe in presumption of innocence, due process, but you got two eyewitnesses that are saying they practiced and staged the attack.
That's pretty compelling evidence.
That's almost slam dunk evidence.
Isn't there video evidence too?
Then you got video of the other two guys involved in this whole thing.
They're buying the very items, the rope, the red hat, etc.
that were allegedly used in the hoax.
And they've given specifics.
The cops are furious because they did their job.
They spent literally thousands of man hours on this.
Chicago can barely afford to keep their city, their streets safe.
And this one prosecutor, so it's racist.
Why wouldn't you prosecute somebody?
How do you think?
A grand jury already surrendered what when uh when the police superintendent him himself is black.
So how is she charging racism?
You're talking about Eddie Johnson.
Yeah.
Let me tell you, that he's more angry than anybody in all this.
And Then it gets even worse.
I saw when she was speaking at Jesse Jackson's, I guess, Rainbow Coalition.
You know, then you have Congressman Bobby Rush calling Chicago police the sworn enemy of black people and demanding the Cook County State Attorney, Kim Fox resign over her office as handling any calling for that means, you know, she friends of police, sworn enemy of black people.
He said during this press conference that she was at.
And they always taking the position that black people can get shot down in the street by members of the Chicago police department and suffer no consequences.
Well, Eddie Johnson, the head of the department, is an African American.
Maxine Waters praising the Chicago prosecutors and Kim Fox for what happened here.
Oh, by the way, one uh one rage hate Trump media mob update, and that is they skipped oh, that's right, that we created another two hundred thousand jobs in America.
Now we're getting close to six million Trump jobs, three point eight percent unemployment rate, record lows, they never talk about that.
Um all of the the case of these uh parents out in Hollywood, Felicity Huspin, Huh, what's her name?
Huffman?
What was she in the show?
Desperate housewives, right?
Or something like that?
All right.
Um, not a show that I watched a whole lot.
Watch it at all.
Well, I I uh either that or I read that she was in it.
Anyway, she she was smart.
Now she apparently did the least of anybody.
There were people paying four or five hundred thousand dollars to this guy, and they knew that they were paying to get cheating on tests on these ACTs or SATs, and then there were people paying four and five and six hundred thousand dollars.
They would work the system two ways, and one would be through the you know, cheating on the test, and then they'd actually go so far as to take a picture of their kid and put it on the f on the body of an athlete and claim, well, the kids involved in crew or the kids involved and some of the pictures weren't of the kids even like at all.
Like they didn't even put the faces on the kids.
They just used plain photos of other persons' kids and submitted it.
And the parents knew that these websites, quote, of their kids existed.
But the other thing that's weird that no one's pointing out is they wrote off all this money as tax write-offs.
They did it as a donation.
Well, that's a problem too.
Now you ever by the way, all these issues become tax issues.
Well, now the parents like Laurie Laughlin that didn't plead guilty.
Listen, the you you there's no jury in America that's gonna let you off here.
I don't know what their lawyers thinking.
And at that point, you know what?
They obviously did it, in my humble opinion, I believe in due process.
If they can prove they didn't, that's great.
Let's assume for a second if they did this, the dumbest thing they can do, because they got new charges of money laundering today in all of this.
Maybe they should talk to Kim Fox.
Well, I thought Felicity Huffman was smart.
And and again, she had only spent 15 grand.
These other people spending 500, 600,000, and I guess it's not about the money.
That was another weird thing.
The people that hired this guy, you know, they all paid varying sums of money, so there was no consistency in whatever services he had.
And anyway, she was Huffman was accused of paying fifteen grand to have a proctor of a test, boost his daughter's SAT score.
And her statement was smart.
Because if you did it, and as and you know that they're they're telling you that they're gonna try make more charges, either cooperate, accept the responsibility, or we're gonna charge you more.
So she said, I'm pleading guilty to the charge brought against me by the United States Attorney's Office.
I am in full acceptance of my guilt with the deep regret and shame over what I have done.
I accept full responsibility for my actions and will accept the consequences that stem from those actions.
I am ashamed of the pain I have caused my daughter, my family, my friends, my colleagues, and the educational community.
I want to apologize to them, and especially I want to apologize to the students who work hard every day to get into college to their parents who make tremendous sacrifices to support their children and do so honestly.
My daughter knew absolutely nothing about my actions, and in my misguided and profoundly wrong way, I b I have betrayed her.
This transgression towards her and the public, I will carry for the rest of my life.
My desire to help my daughter is no excuse to break the law or engage in dishonesty.
You know what?
I respect what she did here.
Smart.
What kind of justice should there be for this kind of a crime?
I think for her, you know, just as long as for her, I think I think community service.
I think, you know, for those that went so much deeper than this, they they're going It's not even what I want them.
They're going to jail.
As long as there's something because between this and smallette, I mean the American public just can't stand to see the city.
It's not as a zero-sum game.
In other words, there's only X number of spots available in these schools.
And, you know, there's – I only know from, like, for example, there's – for every sport – You have, you know, they kind of grade the ability of players.
Like, for example, in tennis, there's a tennis site called tennis recruiting.com.
Well, for example, there's only 25 blue chip players in the country in any given grade.
That's it.
There's only 55 stars in any given grade in the country.
Now, you got to remember, these teams have 12, 13 people on the squad.
And, you know, then you've got uh four-star player.
That's the top 200 in the country.
Now, with all the schools and all the positions, boom, you know, you've got a lot of opportunities if you get to that level of play.
Um, and it's all based on your record, and you you can look at any kid's record going back to when they were not eight, nine years old, and it's all out there and available.
But um, you know, so I think in that terms, and then you know somebody's academic.
How does somebody end up with a 1580 on their SATs and they're B C student?
It's not gonna happen.
Oh, I just had a good day.
I just had a really good day.
Um, and I just don't think I think of the I think the ones that took it so far, I just I get it.
Everybody's a helicopter parent today.
Everybody life isn't like when we were kids.
When I was a kid, I'd get off the school bus, I'd run into the house, grab whatever equipment I needed, and I was gone on my bike.
See ya later.
Nobody knew where I was.
All right, my sources on the ground saying things uh it's a tight race, but uh looking good for Prime Minister Netanyahu and the right-wing coalition.
Greg, Sarah, Tom Fitton, also the battle over the border.
We got Dan Bongino, Geraldo, uh, Lawrence Jones, Victor Davis Hans, and much more.
All happening nine Eastern, Hannity on Fox.
Big night tonight.
I'm promising you, news, truth, you won't get anywhere else.
